[...] Cory Booker! Whatever would g...
Did White House threaten Cory Booker for criticizing Obama’s attack ad? « Full Metal Patriot on Obama threatens to withhold Social Security checks despite sufficient funds [UPDATED] Social Security Chief Actuary exposes Obama deception
White House’s new “Kill Or Release” policy for terror suspects
Rather than dealing with the politically-incorrect subject of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, President Obama is voting “present” when asked by our soldiers what they are to do with captured terrorists. From the man who has a penchant for peppering his speeches with “Now let me be clear…”, our President’s newest counterterrorism strategy is anything but. [emphasis added below — FMP]
Usama bin Laden has been killed. The U.S. is poised to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. And the Obama administration’s shift in counterterrorism strategy from land wars to precision strikes and raids is raising concerns that the White House has adopted a policy of targeting killings for terror suspects.
With no new detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay since March 2008, a top military commander told Congress recently that there is no clear policy for dealing with suspected terrorist leaders who are captured overseas.
In many cases, the suspects are taken to a ship offshore until a decision is approved by the White House.
Vice Adm. William McRaven, the commander of the Navy SEALs team that killed Usama bin Laden, said under questioning at a congressional testimony that the longest the U.S. can keep a suspect on the ship depends on whether the suspect can be prosecuted in a U.S. court or returned to a third-party country.
“If we can’t do either one of those, then we’ll release the individual,” McRaven said in response to questioning by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., “And that becomes the unenviable option, but it is an option.”
With no consistent policy on detention or prosecution, congressional and intelligence sources told Fox News that the preemptive option has apparently become the “kill” option.
It appears that our President is allowing his political obligations to obfuscate our military’s strategy. When soldiers are unclear about their orders, they are more likely to hesitate. And that puts them more at risk.
I don’t necessarily disagree with the idea of simply killing all jihadists rather than capturing them. It’s a cold-blooded strategy, but then again we’re not in a conventional war against uniformed opponents, and keeping detainees locked in a cushy detention center which caters to their every whim certainly hasn’t been working out for us. Killing them in-theater prevents the possibility of that particular terrorist being able to kill another American, and it’s a damn sight better than the ridiculous notion of releasing a known terrorist back onto the battlefield. However, if that’s going to be what is expected of our men and women in uniform, then our Commander In Chief needs to have the testicular fortitude to be absolutely clear on the matter.
Posted by FullMetalPatriot
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT
If they get rid of those stupid technicalities it would be better off. Using how long a prisoner has been held to determine whether he will be tried in a US court, sent to someone else, or be released is ludicrous at best. I think our policy should be “take no prisoners” – all jihadists should have a preemptive death sentence on them.